First published in 1982, this classic work by anthropologist Jerome
R. Mintz has been reprinted with a new foreword discussing its
significance to both its specific subject matter and the field of
anthropology in general. It is an enduring example of in-depth
ethnographic research, as well as a historical study of complex
political and social relations. Mintz examines the small but significant
anarchist uprising that took place in the Spanish town of Casas Viejas
in 1933, just a few years prior to the Spanish Civil War. He
investigates events leading up to the revolt and its aftermath, through
official accounts, press releases, and interviews with those who were
present. Through these multi-faceted perspectives, Mintz presents a
clear picture of the uprising and its place in the larger political
history of Spain, and in the process refutes some previously published
accounts of events and makes a valuable contribution to historical
understanding.

In order to gather his detailed knowledge, Mintz spent years
conducting fieldwork in Spain in the 1960s and 70s, gaining the trust of
those involved in the uprising, their descendants, friends, and
neighbors. Since his research involved an event that took place decades
earlier, he had to track down sources who had moved, a task made all the
more difficult because Spain was still under Franco's rule at the
time of his research, and anarchism was not a safe topic of
investigation. After years of oppression, his informants were often wary
of talking to anyone, and the government often questioned those who did.
Despite these difficulties, Mintz was able to speak to a great many of
the surviving participants of the uprising. These interviews, combined
with painstaking descriptions of Spanish society and the political
climate that engendered the anarchist movement, paint a detailed picture
of not only that famous day's events, but also of the social
inequality and unrest that led up to them and of the repression that
followed.

The anarchist uprising in Casas Viejas took place on January 11,
1933. It claimed the lives of two civil guards, while the brutal
government reaction the next day killed 20 villagers, including both
anarchists and unarmed townspeople. Although this battle was small in
comparison with many armed conflicts, the events at Casas Viejas had a
lasting effect on Spanish government and society. It was already a
tumultuous time, since the Spanish government had just transitioned from
a monarchy to a still unstable republic. Social unrest was rampant among
the poor, including a sizable anarchist following. The old monarchical
system had allowed the growth of vast social inequality, and a few
noblemen or others of the wealthy upper class owned the majority of
land. Many of these landowners spent the majority of their time in urban
centers, leaving their land to be rented out or worked by day laborers.
Especially in southern Andalusia, most of the people were extremely poor
landless agricultural workers, while the land and wealth were controlled
by a very few. These landowners often left land fallow in order to
increase the prices of crops, or charged exorbitant rent if they did
allow others to plant on it. Laborers' wages were very low for long
days of backbreaking labor, and their families still went hungry.

This extreme inequality sparked great social unrest and, influenced
by global movements, ideas of socialism and anarchism became popular
among workers. Due to Spain's rural population, the need for
communal labor to work the land, and isolation from major governing
centers, the philosophy of Russian anarchist Michael Bakunin,
emphasizing cooperation and local control, won greater popular support
than the state communism advocated by Marx. Anarchism developed into a
major movement in Spain, and even small towns, such as Casas Viejas,
often had their own anarchist sindicato, where members met to educate
themselves and discuss political ideas and revolutionary plans. These
sindicatos were nationally linked by newspapers and representative
meetings, and they cooperated to declare general strikes that displayed
their solidarity and maximized their impact on land and business owners
by adding leverage to the workers' demands. One such strike was
planned to involve railroad workers, and the more militant members of
the anarchist movement decided to take advantage of the lack of access
to transportation by government troops in order to begin the revolution
in earnest.

All sindicatos were set to revolt on the signal from leaders in
Barcelona, but due to government infiltration their plans were
discovered, the planned rail workers' strike was called off, and
the anarchists were quickly defeated. However, word of this defeat did
not reach smaller towns quickly enough, and Casas Viejas, believing
itself to be part of a national movement, declared their town under
anarchist control and laid siege to the civil guard barracks, in the
process of which two guards were killed. Government retribution for this
was swift and brutal. More guards were sent in, and although most of the
anarchists had already fled the town, those who remained, along with
their friends and family, were attacked. They were under fire throughout
the night, and those who still lived were burned to death when guards
set fire to their hut in the morning. Not satisfied with this, the
guards went through town and chose twelve other men and executed them in
front of the hut. The government then combed the countryside for those
who fled, and they were sent to prison. A public outcry was raised over
the brutality, especially when it eventually became known that many of
those killed had been unarmed and not involved in the uprising. The
Republican government was widely criticized, which further destabilized
the country, ironically leading to a rightwing rebellion, a bloody civil
war, and the fascist regime of Francisco Franco. What reforms the
Republic had managed to enact were undone, and the anarchists faced
decades of further persecution, to the point that some who were
interviewed for this book did not want to be named even years later.

The rebellion caught the attention not only of the people and
government in Spain, but also of the international community. It was
written about by anarchists and scholars, and used to further various
causes, but never, until Mintz, was it directly investigated. Although
others, including various political inquiry committees and scholars such
as Primitive Rebels author Eric Hobsbawm, went to the town, none of them
recorded the views of the townspeople, preferring instead to form events
to fit their preconceived theories. Because of this, factual errors were
made, and then repeated through scholarly research based on these
misinformed sources. As an example, Hobsbawm reported Seisdedos, a
70-year old man uninvolved in the anarchist movement, to be the
"charismatic leader" required to fit his theory of social
movements (274). Seisdedos was in fact killed in the fighting, but only
because his anarchist sons were hidden in his hut, and not because of
any actions of his own. While villagers did blame him for much of the
rebellion, this was only because he was dead and therefore a safe target
at which to direct the wrath of authorities. Through his in-depth
research, Mintz was able to discover truths such as these behind the
often-confused accounts of events. He refutes many previous examinations
of events, thus providing a valuable contribution to Spanish political
history and an excellent example for the merits of ethnographic study.

The book is detailed to a fault, occasionally losing its direction
due to extensive notes on background events, but this is a minor concern
and only serves to highlight the well-grounded research of the author.
This important work is a classic anthropological study, used to teach
subjects ranging from political history to public memory, and definitely
deserves to be reprinted. Although left-wing politics are no longer
taboo in Spain since the demise of Franco's government, the basic
inequality Mintz deals with remains an important topic worldwide.